Vern,
"Mr. Ehrman.. is unquestionably NOT a Christian..."
By this I take you to mean that anyone who turns from the faith has lost their salvation or never really was saved?
It is my experience that a person can have a religious experience and later depart from what is considered to be the fundamentals of "The Faith" (I think many Christians believe this.)
Greetings from Tortola in the incredibly beautiful BVI.
I finally got to a computer and wanted to acknowledge your comments Dave.
Having a religious experiece, which udoubtedly many people have, is unfortunately not the equivalent to the kind of salvation of which the Bible speaks.
I fully realise that I am now in a very precarious position as I am attempting to adduce a source of authority which you seem to reject outright, namely the Bible.
Nonetheless, Biblical salvation, which issues in eternal life, is precisely defined as a knowledge of God, and Jesus Christ, whom He (God) has sent.
If you, or anyone else for that matter, denies the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, the same Bible which assures such salvation proclaims that if you are correct, then the faith of all Christians is a vain one.
So you see that a denial of the resurrection of Jesus Christ and saving faith are mutually incompatible things.
I do agree that many who once made a profession of faith subsequently renounced it.
Keep in mind that there is a monumental difference between admission of sin and confession (which involves repentance).
I personally do not believe that any one who has come to saving faith by a personal knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ can ever truly renounce Him.
There may be doubts, yes, failures, yes, even terrible sin and rebellion, but my own opinion is if that God saves you, that condition is irrevocable.
"What matters is what he believes not what schools he has attended"
Surely you aren't saying his accomplishments at Moody, Wheaton and Princeton, his mastery of language had no bearing on his research?
I think that it does in fact have substantial bearing on his research.
Faith must be held in a clear conscience Dave.
There is nothing more deadly than a capable mind in possesion of facts, even truth, but is in a state of enmity with God.
I do not know Dr. Erhman personally, but I can tell you with great confidence based on much experience, men in his position do not have a head issue, it is one of the heart.
Dr Erhman's rejection of the faith has nothing whatsoever to do with the findings of his own research. His rejection of the faith in my view preceeded any such findings.
"...his argument appears to be woefully ignorant of Hebrew Scribal tradition"
Gee I wonder? Have you read the book?
He discusses at length the literacy rates and the transcription practices of the early church.
Portions of it for self education, but not in its entirety.
"Professor Bart...denies the resurrection..."
I thought this was obvious? My guess is after he came to the conclusions that the Bible doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny that it must be bunk.
Again, read the book! He clearly presents and argument that the originals are not available for examination, he continues by showing that the copies are filled with numerous changes, omissions, errors, insertions etc..
Read the book!
He is of course entitled to his opinion. You must keep in mind that countless equally able scholars hold a different position, and the real issue is whether you are personally willing to base yours on what Dr. Erhman's asserts in his book.
It might be helpful to you do do a brief investigation of the number of extant documents relating to the NT, and the degree of consistency shown to exist among them.
It will do a lot for your head issues.
The heart is another matter entirely.
I go swimming!
In Christ,
Verne